From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sylwester Nawrocki Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 00:47:55 +0100 Message-ID: <510B02AB.4080908@gmail.com> References: <1359107722-9974-1-git-send-email-sachin.kamat@linaro.org> <1359107722-9974-2-git-send-email-sachin.kamat@linaro.org> <510987B5.6090509@gmail.com> <050101cdff52$86df3a70$949daf50$%dae@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <050101cdff52$86df3a70$949daf50$%dae@samsung.com> Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Inki Dae Cc: 'Sachin Kamat' , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, patches@linaro.org, s.nawrocki@samsung.com List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Inki, On 01/31/2013 02:30 AM, Inki Dae wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Sylwester Nawrocki [mailto:sylvester.nawrocki@gmail.com] >> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 5:51 AM >> To: Inki Dae >> Cc: Sachin Kamat; linux-media@vger.kernel.org; dri- >> devel@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org; >> patches@linaro.org; s.nawrocki@samsung.com >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery >> support for G2D >> >> On 01/30/2013 09:50 AM, Inki Dae wrote: >>>> +static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = { >>>> + { .compatible = "samsung,g2d-v41" }, >>> >>> not only Exynos5 and also Exyno4 has the g2d gpu and drm-based g2d >>> driver shoud support for all Exynos SoCs. How about using >>> "samsung,exynos5-g2d" instead and adding a new property 'version' to >>> identify ip version more surely? With this, we could know which SoC >>> and its g2d ip version. The version property could have '0x14' or >>> others. And please add descriptions to dt document. >> >> Err no. Are you suggesting using "samsung,exynos5-g2d" compatible string >> for Exynos4 specific IPs ? This would not be correct, and you still can > > I assumed the version 'v41' is the ip for Exynos5 SoC. So if this version > means Exynos4 SoC then it should be "samsung,exynos4-g2d". Yes, v3.0 is implemented in the S5PC110 (Exynos3110) SoCs and Exynos4210, V4.1 can be found in Exynos4212 and Exynos4412, if I'm not mistaken. So we could have: compatible = "samsung,exynos-g2d-3.0" /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */ compatible = "samsung,exynos-g2d-4.1" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */ or alternatively compatible = "samsung,exynos3110-g2d" /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */ compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-g2d" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */ I don't see a need to use an additional redundant property to identify the device. These IPs across Exynos SoC do differ and specifying a general property like "samsung,exynos4-g2d" for them would simply be a violation of existing conventions. -- Thanks, Sylwester